>>7841669
Bukowski wrote his poetry almost exclusively in free verse, no meter, no rhyme scheme, not much of any of those technical devices that seem to make poems "poemy." Hence the appearance of "ordinary prose with weird indentation."

I'm no poetry expert, but aside from those aforementioned poetic devices like rhyme and meter, really the only thing that makes something a poem is being called a poem. A poem should also elicit some kind of emotional response. Bukowski wrote a fuckton of poems, some of which were great, and a lot of which were dogshit. The "ordinary prose with weird indentation" ones are likely the latter. The good ones stand out, but you gotta dig for em. Here's a good, brief article about Bukowski's appeal as a poet:

http://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2007/sep/05/bukowski

>>7841735
Poetry is metrical writing.What Bukowski produced cannot be called poetry.

>>7842030
grandpa please

File: liliumpardandcorralitos1.jpg (324 KB, 1600x1082) Image search: [Google]

324 KB, 1600x1082

>>7841669
>A poem should also elicit some kind of emotional response.
this is wrong. there's nothing poetry "should" do.

>>7841669
because there's no definition for "poetry". if people agree that a thing is poetry, it can be poetry. people have to find their own definitions.

personally, i don't call what bukowski wrote poetry. but that doesn't matter, because most people do.

>>7842036
tumblr please

>>7842030
Even 13 year-old boys who have seen Dead Poet Society know that is utter bullshit.

ITT: People who have never studied poetry/analized a poem.

>>7842301
i teach poetry and have been reading and writing it for two decades but please tell me about how i've never studied a poem

>>7842142
>ecause there's no definition for "poetry". if people agree that a thing is poetry, it can be poetry. people have to find their own definitions.
Why can't poetry be metered rhyme, and these experimental types just be something else. Seems like a more useful definition than 'general consensus'.